Major Assessment Fee

[budawe]

It seems that some folks have forgotten that there are now 2 paths to the Runoffs. One via the Majors program and one through the divisonal programs. Both are on fairly equal footing and provide two options for our members.

Most folks don't realize how differently thing are done around the country and frankly, one program can't fit all circumstances. Some areas have strong local racing, some have strong national racing. The regions and divisions were allowed the freedom to design the divisional path any way they wanted. In some areas, like the West coast there's still some towing envolved in other areas very little travel is needed.

I urge everyone to review their respective divisional programs and decide accordingly. As far as what used to be called regional racing, it still exists. There will be regional type series like SARRC and MARRS if you want to run those. Run your local events and decide for yourself if you want to go to the runoffs or not.

Remember, even the Runoffs is going to move around the country. I can't think of a more flexible way to represent our members.

[Hardingfv32]

... I can't think of a more flexible way to represent our members.

But can you think of a more cost affective way? Stay on point: Are the fees being charged for the Majors program a beneficial expense for the competitors? Exactly how is the Assessment fee allocated? Is there a written guideline available to the membership about this allocation?

Brian

[Brett Lane]

Come on guys, It's about the same as 5 gallons of race fuel, or 2 bottles of decent brake fluid.

Or 4 lap dances. Ok, 2 if she knows the race officials that are bumming you out.

Or one massage...

you get the idea.

[budawe]

I apologize, since I thought I was on point mentioning that no one has to take the Majors path to the runoffs. If you don't like the Majors pricing, you have an option.

Regarding fees, I don't understand where the $135 number being quoted is coming from. The $50/$100 permanant number program is voluntary, a one time charge, and includes a $25 certificate for merchandise.

Every Majors entry includes $30 for tow money just like national entries have for years. Every dollar collected for the tow fund goes back to competitors.

There will be an assessment of $60 per entry that will be collected to offset the additional costs associated with the Majors weekends. This assessment is not allocated to any other programs or events and assures that the Majors, like all events in SCCA, is financially a break-even. Using the 150 entrant number used in previous postings, this assessment is $9000 a weekend. When you figure in trophies, decals flags and travel reimbursement mentioned before, there's not a lot left over.

[reidhazelton]

Using the 150 entrant number used in previous postings, this assessment is $9000 a weekend. When you figure in trophies, decals flags and travel reimbursement mentioned before, there's not a lot left over.

Before this new fee, we already had these things at Nationals. Why does it now cost $9k a weekend more to change the name on the trophy from National to Major. I understand Steward/Official overhead is an extra cost.

Brian M. - Thank you for responding and giving us added information. That is much appreciated.

[reidhazelton]

Come on guys, It's about the same as 5 gallons of race fuel, or 2 bottles of decent brake fluid.

Or 4 lap dances. Ok, 2 if she knows the race officials that are bumming you out.

Or one massage...

you get the idea.

That has been said about every increase for as long as I can remember. $50 a year, each year for 5 years makes a hefty entry fee. This is a 10% increase if that makes any difference.

I think all Brian is asking is what the money is used for, and I have to agree (I can't believe I'm saying that) with him. The entry fee seems to keep going up, and up, and up. $700+ a weekend is getting very close to making it a no-go for many people.

[GT1Vette]

Sorry to be late to the party and others have already answered many of the questions, but here are the details:

= = = = = = =

For each of the Majors championship weekends the National Office will collect $135/entry. That is broken down as:

. Insurance (liability and participant accident) - $25
. Volunteer Incentive Program - $6
. Sanction fee (initial and excess) - $14
. Runoffs Travel fund - $30
. Majors assessment fee - $60

The $60 Majors assessment fee covers:

· Event specific
o Pre and post-event coverage on the Majors website
o Majors points tracking (for Runoffs qualification)
o Event trophies (two races, three places)
o Checkered flags (two races)
o Commemorative towels
o Commemorative event posters
o Champagne for Victory Circle
o PA and Backdrop for Victory Circle
o Series Personnel
- Series Chief Steward
- Series Administrator
- Series Tech Coordinator
- On-site PR Person
- Me (I won’t be at every event but I'll be at 13 of them in 2014)

· Series specific
o Championship trophies
o Season-ending Awards party

In 2013 the sanction fees, insurance, VIP fund, and Runoffs Travel Fund were all split out separately, but for 2014 they're combined and (besides being easier to calculate) they also work out slightly less per entry for any event over 150 cars. As others have said, the Majors assessment fee in 2013 was $50 so any increase in entry fees beyond $10 is the host region's choice.

To those that don't think running a Majors event is worth $60 more than a standard regional, I'm not going to argue with you. We've said all along the Majors program is decidedly not for everyone, but there are certainly those that DO feel the value of the services offered is worth the extra cost.

As always, YMMV...

[reidhazelton]

Thank you Butch. Great answer, I am satisfied.

[budawe]

Thanks Butch. Now you all know why BOD depends on the staff in Topeka for much of our information.

[Hardingfv32]

Thanks Butch

1) Why was this information not present to the membership when the Assessment Fee passed?

2) Not picking on Brian M, but why would a board member not have knowledge of the total $135 assessment number. Does this indicate a indifference on the part of the Board towards entry costs?

3) Will anyone be reviewing the effectiveness of these added expenses? Is there any data that indicates that a Major event is drawing more entries than a Dbl National of the past?

Brian

[grapefarmeral]

I guess 30+ years of running my own company hasn't taught me anything... If the economy is in the crapper and you're losing customers, you need to raise prices... Simple enough, with fewer customers (members) racing, the ones still participating get to pay more... That works in the real world till the sheriff shows up for the bankruptcy sale.

One of the last years the Runoffs was at Mid Ohio, SCCA did a survey/poll and found out that the 'average' Runoffs competitor had an income of $250,000. If you do the math the 'average' makes $125 per hour or roughly $85 per hour after taxes. So If you want to do for instance the Florida races in January the basic expenses could be as follows:

2 sets of tires $850 x 2 = $1700
Entry Fees $1165
Mileage (round trip + local) 3000 x $.595 = $1785
Motel/Hotel $1600
Total $6250

That means if you make $250K it will take you 73 hours of work (almost 2 weeks)to pay for the trip assuming that there are no breakdowns on the road, crashes, blown motors (none of that ever happens, doe's it) and I haven't even figured amortization of trailer, race car, rebuilds, supplies, misc, etc, etc, etc.

If you take the average median income for an American worker, it works out to nearly 12 weeks for the Florida races. No wonder we're losing 'customers' to drifting, track days, and non SCCA club events..

For years I wrote letters about Pro racing and the drain on the club... I always thought this was a club, but it seems like we are the cash cow for Pro Racing. Why do we need Pro Racing? Is it supplying cash to the club coffers? At one time I would read the yearly financial statements and it was clear we as a Club were supporting Pro Racing.. then the 'Club' changed the way they reported the financials and it seemed to combine items to the point you couldn't tell where the money was going... While I'm on this rant why are all the Pro events listed before the CLUB events on the schedule in Sports Car.


So I guess I'm with Brian in asking where the money is going and shouldn't there be a better and less expensive way to conduct race weekends and the club in general... Heck we're paying $400,000 to have someone run the club, you'd think for that salary we'd be able to hire a real maverick that would get the CLUB back on track...(pun was intended)...

Al

[GT1Vette]

Thanks Butch

1) Why was this information not present to the membership when the Assessment Fee passed?

2) Not picking on Brian M, but why would a board member not have knowledge of the total $135 assessment number. Does this indicate a indifference on the part of the Board towards entry costs?

3) Will anyone be reviewing the effectiveness of these added expenses? Is there any data that indicates that a Major event is drawing more entries than a Dbl National of the past?

Brian

I can't answer all your questions, but I'll answer what I know:

1) Quite simply, the membership cannot be consulted on everything the BoD decides or we'd never get anything done. You elect a Director to represent your interests and we get criticism that even THAT process is too cumbersome to adapt quickly! Some things go out for member input while others don't - we often make decisions based on what we THINK members want even while knowing a portion will disagree.

2) Unless you've been there you really don't have any idea how much information a BoD member needs to absorb each month. Not speaking for Brian either, but I'd guess the important statement when voting on the Majors assessment was "it's $10 more than it was in 2013 and we're adding the Series Tech Coordinator".

3) Absolutely. It's tough to compare 2013 to 2012 because event formats changed but I am very definitely tracking event participation at the "same" events year-to-year. Even taking CoTA out of the mix and "adjusting counts" to establish equivalency (for example, the Sprints were a single in 2012 and a "1.5" in 2013, all the NEDiv events were "Bonus Nationals" in 2012, etc.) the 2013 events showed an average increase of 26.8% over the "similar" event in 2012. Obviously we cannot say all of that increase was due to the Majors program, but I DO feel comfortable saying the added elements of the Majors weekend did not HURT participation levels. That is further supported by comments received during the post-event surveys - a significant portion of our members like the direction the Majors program is moving.

One more thing - I've long held the belief that if I explain the logic behind a decision then those that disagree will either (a) understand or (b) point out things I might have missed in my thought process. The best case is we come to a mutual agreement while the worst case scenario is we agree to disagree and head on down the road (ex - "the Majors are not for everyone"). I also understand my philosophy is not shared universally but I'm prepared to deal with those criticisms. In other words - if you have a question and I know the answer, I'll do my best to provide that information for you (but don't abuse it! ).

See y'all at the track...

[DaveW]

...
One more thing - I've long held the belief that if I explain the logic behind a decision then those that disagree will either (a) understand or (b) point out things I might have missed in my thought process. The best case is we come to a mutual agreement while the worst case scenario is we agree to disagree and head on down the road (ex - "the Majors are not for everyone"). I also understand my philosophy is not shared universally but I'm prepared to deal with those criticisms. In other words - if you have a question and I know the answer, I'll do my best to provide that information for you (but don't abuse it! ).

See y'all at the track...

Butch, as you say, open communication prevents most misunderstandings. It's too bad more folks don't operate that way!

Thanks for the info,

[RussMcB]

<snip> $700+ a weekend is getting very close to making it a no-go for many people.

Not getting close. Already there.

[budawe]

When I reviewed the Majors assessment program, several pre-existing fees like tow fund, volunteer incentive program, sanction and insurance fees were not included. They were not included because these costs were not considered incremental to normal weekends. All these expenses were part of entry fees charged by the regions in the past and don't really represent new fees.

Take these fees from the $135 and you arrive at the $60 which is the only Majors asssessment.

I know the BOD concentrates on making our process as transparent as possible. Some of us actually dare venture into the forums, usually at some personal cost, to improve our members understanding. And, if one goes to our website SCCA.COM everything we do is made public. The complete minutes of every BOD meeting are posted in Fastrack days after our meetings. If you sign on thru your membership number, you have access to a wealth of information and details that among other things, include our operations manual, financial statements and by laws.

[reidhazelton]

I guess 30+ years of running my own company hasn't taught me anything... If the economy is in the crapper and you're losing customers, you need to raise prices... Simple enough, with fewer customers (members) racing, the ones still participating get to pay more... That works in the real world till the sheriff shows up for the bankruptcy sale.



Al

That guarantees bankruptcy will happen. Bleed the remaining customers until they die; not exactly a growth strategy. The idea here, is to not have that happen. I think we would all like SCCA to be around for a long time, and that is the point of the concern.

[Steve Demeter]

Butch,

How much does coverage on the website cost??

And who looks at it except the competitors who already know.

The entire thing sounds like a boondoggle to me.

as has been stated "just raise the prices when you start losing customers and the rest will soon follow" to paraphrase.

The Majors should give a competitor more, not less value for their money.

[DaveW]

...I know the BOD concentrates on making our process as transparent as possible. Some of us actually dare venture into the forums, usually at some personal cost, to improve our members understanding. And, if one goes to our website SCCA.COM everything we do is made public. The complete minutes of every BOD meeting are posted in Fastrack days after our meetings. If you sign on thru your membership number, you have access to a wealth of information and details that among other things, include our operations manual, financial statements and by laws.

Brian,

Thank you also for posting. The more info the better!

[GT1Vette]

Steve,

Granted event coverage on the website doesn't cost $60, but having someone at the event to provide the coverage (and post every evening) DOES cost some money. And did you stop reading after the first bullet point? Again:

= = = = = =

The $60 Majors assessment fee covers:

· Event specific
o Pre and post-event coverage on the Majors website
o Majors points tracking (for Runoffs qualification)
o Event trophies (two races, three places)
o Checkered flags (two races)
o Commemorative towels
o Commemorative event posters
o Champagne for Victory Circle
o PA and Backdrop for Victory Circle
o Series Personnel
- Series Chief Steward
- Series Administrator
- Series Tech Coordinator
- On-site PR Person
- Me (I won’t be at every event but I'll be at 13 of them in 2014)

· Series specific
o Championship trophies
o Season-ending Awards party

= = = = =

And finally:

= = = = =

To those that don't think running a Majors event is worth $60 more than a standard regional, I'm not going to argue with you. We've said all along the Majors program is decidedly not for everyone, but there are certainly those that DO feel the value of the services offered is worth the extra cost.

= = = = =

You obviously don't think the extras are worth the additional expense, but so far enough others disagree that we feel it's worth continuing with the program (I think that falls under "YMMV...").

[jhenn4716]

Butch,

I think you did a great job explaining what we get for our money. I'm looking forward to my first majors race next year and won't mind spending the money. I race a FV so it's not like I'm overflowing in $ but I can see where its going.

Jeff Hennessy
FV #55

[Hardingfv32]

Butch, again thanks for the info.

I base my perception of the Majors program on a limited view as a S Ca. competitor. The data you present on entries nationally does indicate success. Keep up good work and communications.

Brian

[Bob Clark]

[QUOTE=budawe;415411]I apologize, since I thought I was on point mentioning that no one has to take the Majors path to the runoffs. If you don't like the Majors pricing, you have an option.

NO I DON"T!!!! We were told that ONLY Majors races go towards car counts!! If your class is in trouble ( and mine is ) and you have a ton of racers at the divisional level and small numbers at Majors your class could be gone at the Majors level. Then no trip to the Runoff's for you.

[butch deer]

[QUOTE=Bob Clark;415761]

I apologize, since I thought I was on point mentioning that no one has to take the Majors path to the runoffs. If you don't like the Majors pricing, you have an option.

NO I DON"T!!!! We were told that ONLY Majors races go towards car counts!! If your class is in trouble ( and mine is ) and you have a ton of racers at the divisional level and small numbers at Majors your class could be gone at the Majors level. Then no trip to the Runoff's for you.

I didn't know that there were car count rules anymore. They seem to have been ignored for the past 10 years or so. If they exist are there also car count rules for divisional classes that they can exceed and move up to majors status?

[Todd Butler]

[QUOTE=butch deer;416093]

I didn't know that there were car count rules anymore. They seem to have been ignored for the past 10 years or so. If they exist are there also car count rules for divisional classes that they can exceed and move up to majors status?

Majors racing includes all National classes as defined in the GCR. Until such time as the BoD approves moving a poorly subscribed class to regional-only status or eliminating it by merging with other existing classes, it's still a National class and still running at the Majors and Runoffs.

Your National class car is just that, a National class car in your Division as well. If you meet the Top 3 (or 5 SM/SRF) in Division, you also earn an invite to the Runoffs.

As noted, National car counts will only be counted at the Majors. Just like we only counted National class cars at the old National races. If you are racing a National class car in a Regional race, that great, you get to race, you get to help your local Region stay alive and you have a path to the Runoffs as long as your class is National. The whole idea behind the Majors (and originally National racing before it got diluted) is to cluster credible competition. Being the only TA-caliber GT1 Corvette in a field full of ITA/B cars in a Regional race is not really competition. Being one of 10+ TA-caliber GT1s on track is credible National level competition and that's what we are counting.

Bottom line as Brian said, 2 paths to the Runoffs. Depending on geography, strength of your class in Division, etc, either Majors or Division might be a better shot for a Runoffs invite. You have a choice.

Todd Butler
Area 13 Director

[butch deer]

[QUOTE=Todd Butler;416348]

Majors racing includes all National classes as defined in the GCR. Until such time as the BoD approves moving a poorly subscribed class to regional-only status or eliminating it by merging with other existing classes, it's still a National class and still running at the Majors and Runoffs.

Your National class car is just that, a National class car in your Division as well. If you meet the Top 3 (or 5 SM/SRF) in Division, you also earn an invite to the Runoffs.

As noted, National car counts will only be counted at the Majors. Just like we only counted National class cars at the old National races. If you are racing a National class car in a Regional race, that great, you get to race, you get to help your local Region stay alive and you have a path to the Runoffs as long as your class is National. The whole idea behind the Majors (and originally National racing before it got diluted) is to cluster credible competition. Being the only TA-caliber GT1 Corvette in a field full of ITA/B cars in a Regional race is not really competition. Being one of 10+ TA-caliber GT1s on track is credible National level competition and that's what we are counting.

Bottom line as Brian said, 2 paths to the Runoffs. Depending on geography, strength of your class in Division, etc, either Majors or Division might be a better shot for a Runoffs invite. You have a choice.

Todd Butler
Area 13 Director

I thought there were was no such thing as a regional race anymore? Only Majors and Divisionals. Has the program changed again?

[Bill Bonow]

I thought there were was no such thing as a regional race anymore? Only Majors and Divisionals. Has the program changed again?

I understand the term "Divisional" was not well received. Regional is the replacement term. We have "Majors" and "Regionals".

My personal suggestion to my area director was "Majors" and "Minors". But all I got for a reply was "Nor-Way"

[butch deer]

I understand the term "Divisional" was not well received. Regional is the replacement term. We have "Majors" and "Regionals".

My personal suggestion to my area director was "Majors" and "Minors". But all I got for a reply was "Nor-Way"

Geeze; I was all hyped up to run some Divisionals and they've come and gone in the blink of an eye so I'm back to the same old ho-hum regionals of the past.
Maybe they wouldn't be so ho-hum if they had commemorative towels and an on site PR person.

[Bob Clark]

Geeze; I was all hyped up to run some Divisionals and they've come and gone in the blink of an eye so I'm back to the same old ho-hum regionals of the past.
Maybe they wouldn't be so ho-hum if they had commemorative towels and an on site PR person.

But then you would have to pay an assessment fee for that towel and PR person..

[Todd Butler]

[QUOTE=butch deer;416355]

I thought there were was no such thing as a regional race anymore? Only Majors and Divisionals. Has the program changed again?

Nope. There are 2 classes of racing officially defined: Majors and Regionals. From a sanctioning perspective out of Topeka, SCCA has Majors and Regionals. Some Divisions may choose to designate only specific Regional races as counting towards Divisional championships and call them Divisionals, some Divisions (Norpac is one) may choose to count all races in a Division, including Majors towards the Divisional championship.

Todd Butler
Area 13 Director

[RussMcB]

The southeast has a fairly good description of what they're doing here:
http://sedivracing.org/2014RunOffs_Article.pdf

It's a little easier to understand if you also look at the 2014 SEDiv racing schedule:
http://sedivracing.org/2014_Schedule.pdf

At a high level (if I read it right):

• SECS (Southeast Championship Series) is the new term for what was the SEDiv championsip. These are like the old national races. I think SE Majors also count towards the SECS.
• Regional type races will still be held (SARRC races)
• Some races will be both (like the old Rationals). A competitor can choose getting points towards the SECS series or SARRC, but not both.

[swiftdrivr]

From my perspective, I want more competitors, safe racing, tolerable officiating [volunteers mistakenly costing me a plastic trophy every once in a while isn't going to kill me.] and cost kept to where I can afford to play as often as possible. PR personnel, towels and the fluff are less important than competition and cost control so that more people can participate and I can play more often. Having said that, I budget one weekend with Rand because THATS WHERE THE CARS ARE. it all comes down to balance. The Majors aren't a big deal to me. Maybe if the runoffs were somewhere I wanted to race I'd consider the extra cost worth it, if the car counts were good [not towels and posters, CARS!]. However, to get back to the overall problem of declining participation, to make the car counts good again, lower cost would likely have a much bigger effect.